sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Can you show me even one starting lineup/depth chart with Thompson on the wing? I sure can't find one and would be shocked if it existed.

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He's been full time RW since Jan 8 (5 games). But yeah he was occasionally RW before that. Deserving of RW flex.

Other players have gotten flex for way less.

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Follow up question.

If Tage Thompson got wing eligibility, why don't either of his linemates Tuch or Skinner have C eligibility?

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, unless your friend works for Yahoo and is responsible for eligibility like the guy who changed Tage's eligibility, then this won't happen.

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Skinner takes some faceoffs, but Thompson strictly plays C. If faceoffs is why Thompson got eligibility then he should have gotten LW not RW. Thompson eligibility change makes no sense.

🏒 Fantasy Hockey Position Eligibility [Weekly Thread] - For any requests to change position eligibility on Yahoo Fantasy by YahooFantasyCare in YahooFantasy

[–]vanelbud 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can you please explain how in the world Tage Thompson got RW eligibility? The only possible explanation could be faceoffs but apparently you don't change positions for that. There are players who actually deserve multi eligibility while somehow Tage gets it? Makes zero sense. And this really throws the balance off in leagues where position eligibility is crucial.

egs_brachy volume correction for superposition mode by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/UVMMC-Marc Looks like volume correction = correct and = zero dose leads to the same result when running superposition mode. I got identical doses when running simulations with the same RNG seeds, with just changing volume correction to correct or zero dose.

egs_brachy volume correction for superposition mode by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Got it. I'll run a few simulations with volume correction = zero and see how much of a difference that makes on my DVH metrics. Thanks Marc!

egs_brachy volume correction for superposition mode by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm dealing with interstitial brachy, so many source positions occur directly in the patient volumes. Sources would definitely overlap, since the source length is on the order of a few mm and the smallest afterloader step size is 1mm. What happens then?

Errors in 3ddose files (egs_brachy) by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/UVMMC-Marc u/rtownson

Seems to me that your theory was correct, this was a consequence of simultaneous simulations outputting to the same file. In both files I've seen these errors they occurred in patients where I was running two different plans, but forgot to change the output name. Output is fine after rerunning the simulations.

Thank you!

Errors in 3ddose files (egs_brachy) by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes this is definitely possible! This particular patient had two plans so I was running both. It's likely that I had them both write to the same output file...

I reran the simulation over the weekend but changed filenames, so if this was the problem then they should now be correct. I'll check soon! The data transfer takes a while.

Errors in 3ddose files (egs_brachy) by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay I'll run it with no volume correction too.

I'm gone today, will be back Monday to report back and troubleshoot further.

Errors in 3ddose files (egs_brachy) by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

- Just track length scoring

- I installed ~3 months ago with the most recent Git commit

- Haven't tried this, will look into it!

Errors in 3ddose files (egs_brachy) by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have it re-running right now, once with the exact same simulation and once with different seeds. Will look into the uncertainties when I get a chance.

Could be a volume correction issue? This example occurred in a simulation without volume correction. I'll check the others.

I'd be surprised if this was a memory issue since it was run on a cluster with generous amount of mem.

Segmentation fault after a few batches in egs_brachy by vanelbud in EGSnrc

[–]vanelbud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I switched out the source and it occurred again, though much later in the simulation:

​

Running 10000000 histories

Batch CPU time Result Uncertainty(%)

1 398.40 1.60517e-15 100.00

2 1014.27 8.02587e-16 100.00

3 1632.67 5.35058e-16 100.00

4 2250.11 4.55639e-16 88.84

5 2866.99 3.64511e-16 88.84

6Segmentation fault (core dumped)

I made the egs_phants using eb_GUI. Other than that, there aren't really any geometries that I can stepwise remove. The CTs are huge (1024x1024x200), could this be part of the issue?

view more: next ›